<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2024 (9) TMI 1554 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=759310</link>
    <description>CESTAT Ahmedabad allowed the appeal regarding classification of sawn New Zealand pine logs. The department sought reclassification from CTH 4403 to CTH 4407, requiring proof that goods were cut to extremely accurate dimensions. The tribunal held that photographs and panchnama evidence showed goods had cuboid dimensions but not extremely accurate ones as required. Additionally, 10% logs contained bark traces, further negating accurate dimension requirements. The department failed to prove chipping process was used for better surface finish. Burden of proof for reclassification remained with the department, which was not discharged. Goods were correctly classified under CTH 4403.99, making other issues redundant.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 26 Sep 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 27 Sep 2024 09:58:32 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=770956" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2024 (9) TMI 1554 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=759310</link>
      <description>CESTAT Ahmedabad allowed the appeal regarding classification of sawn New Zealand pine logs. The department sought reclassification from CTH 4403 to CTH 4407, requiring proof that goods were cut to extremely accurate dimensions. The tribunal held that photographs and panchnama evidence showed goods had cuboid dimensions but not extremely accurate ones as required. Additionally, 10% logs contained bark traces, further negating accurate dimension requirements. The department failed to prove chipping process was used for better surface finish. Burden of proof for reclassification remained with the department, which was not discharged. Goods were correctly classified under CTH 4403.99, making other issues redundant.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 26 Sep 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=759310</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>